A US-based technology firm founded in Australia in 1992 has won a long-running patent infringement case again Microsoft, with US$388 million damages being awarded.
In the suit, Uniloc alleged that Microsoft used its patented technology as part of the software giant's product activation methods. A federal jury in Rhode Island found that Windows XP, Office XP, and Windows Server 2003 infringed on a Uniloc patent.
Uniloc was founded by Australian software engineer and self-described independent inventor Ric Richardson, whose blog can be found here.
Microsoft said that it will appeal.
"We are very disappointed in the jury verdict," Microsoft spokesperson Jack Evans said in an email. "We believe that we do not infringe, that the patent is invalid and that this award of damages is legally and factually unsupported. We will ask the court to overturn the verdict."
Microsoft had initially won a summary judgement ruling, which would have ended the case in its favour, but Uniloc appealed that ruling and a federal appeals court last year ruled that the case needed to go to trial with regard to two counts. The trial began 23 March.
It is amusing how Microsoft products, like most others I suppose, come with reams of terms and conditions that have to be agreed upon to the letter before such products can legally be used yet when the shoe is on the other foot the corporate juggernauts like Microsoft expect to be given a free run. Microsoft's argument that patent is invalid should be no defence. They should have argued this before their infringment activities had begun.
This case is no different to that of the CSIRO's claims against HP, Dell, Cisco, et al, over patent breaches. All these companies thumbed their noses at the CSIRO when their claim was first made but are now either losing court cases or entering into settlement discussions with the CSIRO because they know they can't win.